Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

The Myths About Women Who "Cry Rape"

718 replies

DontCallMePeanut · 07/07/2011 01:56

From The Telegraph

Sorry, my head's not in the right place to provide any critique of this at the moment, but thought this would interest the members of the feminist section. Will attempt to comment when I have a clearer head.

OP posts:
UsingMainlySpells · 08/07/2011 16:32

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MitchiestInge · 08/07/2011 16:30

Doesn't not proven mean 'you are free, don't do it again' or something like that?

Original poster
DontCallMePeanut · 08/07/2011 16:29

I think I'd prefer a not proven verdict (as a victim) to a not guilty

Not guilty is too final, implies it didn't happen, and probably helps some of these myths.

Not proven is more likely to be interpreted as a case of it possibly, maybe even probably happened. We just haven't got that definitive evidence.

However, I do think we'd see, possibly, a drop in guilty verdicts if a not proven verdict was available. So, in other ways, it could be damaging to the cause

OP posts:
UsingMainlySpells · 08/07/2011 16:28

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MitchiestInge · 08/07/2011 16:26

I don't know. Don't really care either, just wading through the exchange with that freakoid above (why? Does he think there are hundreds of men falsely accused of rape currently languishing in prison?) made me think of it.

UsingMainlySpells · 08/07/2011 16:21

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

HerBeX · 08/07/2011 16:19

Dunno about that. Do most alleged rapists get off with a not proven verdict in Scotland, as opposed to not guilty?

UsingMainlySpells · 08/07/2011 16:15

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TheAtomicBludger · 08/07/2011 16:14

I agree. It's just to ambiguous a term.

MitchiestInge · 08/07/2011 16:11

We (England Wales) should have 'not proven' like they do up there in Haggis A-Go-Go Land. Otherwise thick people might assume an acquittal means the defendant didn't do it.

TheAtomicBludger · 08/07/2011 16:00

Once today. That means more than once previously? Which means that you have been banned. If I was banned from a nightclub, it wouldn't matter if I went back the next day. Or in in 5 minutes time. I would still be banned.

LeninGrad · 08/07/2011 15:44

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SinicalSal · 08/07/2011 15:40

'Don't play in the feminists garden unless you agree with their principles.'

Similarly don't play in the Evolutionists' garden if you're a creationist. Every thread is not a 'Let's debate the fundamental premise' thread.

'No wonder people think of feminists in the same manner as religious zealouts, you cannot have a discussion.'
Would that be you 'spouting' an 'opinion' again, then?

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Everyone else is entitled to dismiss that opinion on the basis that it's a bit simple, ill thought out, prejudiced.

MsHodgeInHay · 08/07/2011 15:35

I think you think I am someone else. I have been removed once, today. That is it.

SinicalSal · 08/07/2011 15:34

'spout an unpopular opinion'

Ah I see. Mostly we stick to facts and logic on this forum, we try to argue and reason, and often come up with unpopular conclusions. This approach can be a bit tiresome if all you want to do is spout half baked hatefilled opinions though, so I can see how MN might not suit everyone.

MsHodgeInHay · 08/07/2011 15:34

Yes I can see where your sense of justice comes from now, all clear.

Don't play in the feminists garden unless you agree with their principles.

No wonder people think of feminists in the same manner as religious zealouts, you cannot have a discussion.

UsingMainlySpells · 08/07/2011 15:33

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TheAtomicBludger · 08/07/2011 15:30

MsHodge, you have been repeatedly banned not because of one particular post, but because you have been banned.

MarySueFTW · 08/07/2011 15:29

I know LeninGrad, but I imagine it'll be a slap on the wrist and nothing will change. And that case is about someone who was arrested but not charged. It seems these days once someone is charged the papers can reveal the name. In some cases it might help, but I think it's more about the papers wanting the story and the police showing they have made progress (ie look at him, he's probably guilty, right?) at the expense of the right of an innocent person to keep their anonymity and the chance it could influence a jury and possibly cause a mistrial.

TheAtomicBludger · 08/07/2011 15:29

surelynottrue = Yes, I am aware. That is why I argue for better evidence gathering prior to trial, to make sure more get to trial.

MsHodgeInHay · 08/07/2011 15:26

Mumsnet banned me, seems you cannot spout an unpopular opinion in a forum filled with people who get offended easily if you do not tow the line.

Enjoy the consensus cos you have no choice.

LeninGrad · 08/07/2011 15:22

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MarySueFTW · 08/07/2011 15:22

Good point UsingMainlySpells. I'm torn then.

UsingMainlySpells · 08/07/2011 15:21

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

yellabelly · 08/07/2011 15:19

there are plent of male rapists who plead innocent and get away with it. Some on multiple occasions